Advertisement

Effect of tool quality on the machinability characteristics of Al-Cu and Al-Si cast alloys

  • M. Hamed
  • Yasser Zedan
  • Agnes M. Samuel
  • Herbert W. Doty
  • F. H. SamuelEmail author
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 64 Downloads

Abstract

The present work was performed on three types of alloys, viz., Al-6% Cu (coded HT200), 319 alloy, and 356 alloy using dull inserts. The results show that the shape of the dull inserts and cutting characteristics varied from one insert to another and hence it was difficult to obtain reproducible results. Due to the bad shape of the dull inserts, the cutting forces required to machine 14 m of distance were 40–50% higher than those required using new inserts to machine 120 m of cutting distance. The profile of surface roughness using dull tools was almost twice that of the profile obtained using new inserts. However, the signals were much wider in the former case with less number of peaks. Due to the severe irregularities of the edges of the dull tools, neither the alloy composition nor the heat treatment is relevant. The surface finish of all alloys was characterized by the presence of cracks and shallow holes. Residual stresses varied along the width of the machined block. All stresses were of tension type compared to compression type in the un-machined shoulders. Due to the high applied forces required when using dull inserts, the resulting residual stresses were almost twice that generated by new inserts in spite of the large difference in the machining distance. Due to the use of showers of coolant, the chips in all cases were shiny with no signs of burning. In all cases, the burrs were separated from the workpiece.

Keywords

Aluminum alloys Milling Inserts X-ray Surface finishing Residual stresses 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Zaghbani I. and Songmene V. (2009) A force-temperature model including a constitutive law for dry high speed milling of aluminium alloys. Materials Processing Technology, 209, pp 2532–2544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Songmene V, Khettabi R, Zaghbani I, Kouam J, Djebara A (2011) Machining and machinability of aluminum alloys. In: Kvackaj T (ed) ISBN: 978-953-307-244-9, Aluminium alloys, theory and applications. InTech Publications, Croatia, pp 377–400Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Praneeth and N. Naveen, Machining of aluminum alloys: a review. International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET). ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887, Volume 5 Issue X, October 2017Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Santos MC Jr, Machado AR, Sales WF, Barrozo MAS, Ezugwu EO (2016) Machining of aluminum alloys: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-8431-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taylor FW (1907) On the art of cutting metals. ASME Trans 28:31–350Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yen YC, Sohner J, Lilly B, Altan T (2004) Estimation of tool wear in orthogonal cutting using the finite element analysis. J Mater Process Technol 146:82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tang ZT, Liu ZQ, Pan YZ, Wan Y, Ai X (2009) The influence of tool flank wear on residual stresses induced by milling aluminum alloy. J Mater Process Technol 209(9):4502–4508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Robinson JS, Redington W (2015) The influence of alloy composition on residual stresses in heat-treated aluminium alloys. Mater Charact 105:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Manna A, Bhattacharyya B (2003) A study on different tooling systems during machining of Al/SiC-MMC. J Mater Process Technol 123(3):476–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gangopadhyay S, Limido J, Mabru C, Chieragatti R (2010) Effect of cutting speed and surface chemistry of cutting tools on the formation of BUL or BUE and surface quality of the generated surface in dry turning of AA6005 aluminium alloy. Mach Sci Technol 14:208–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roy P, Sarangi SK, Ghosh A, Chattopadhyay AK (2009) Machinability study of pure aluminium and Al–12% Si alloys against uncoated and coated carbide inserts. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 27:535–544Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kelly JF, Cotterell MG (2002) Minimal lubrication machining of aluminum alloys. J Mater Process Technol 120(1–3):327–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hamed M, Zedan Y, Samuel AM, Doty HW, Samuel FH (2019) Milling parameters of Al-Cu and Al-Si cast alloys. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 104(9–12):3731–3743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elsebaie O, Samuel AM, Samuel FH, Doty HW (2008) The effects of mischmetal, cooling rate and heat treatment on the hardness of A319.1, A356.2 and A413.1 Al-Si casting alloys. Mater Sci Eng A 486(1–2):241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kumar DV, Naveen T, Naveenkumar S, Sethupathi S, Srinivasan S (2016) Surface roughness analysis in machining of aluminium alloys (6061 & 6063). Int Res J Eng Technol (IRJET) 03:2814–2821Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barzani MM, Farahany S, Songméné V (2017) Machinability characteristics, thermal and mechanical properties of Al-Mg2Si in-situ composite with bismuth. Meas J Int Meas Confederation 110:263–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee E, Kim Y, Jeong H, Chung H (2015) A study on the surface shape and roughness of aluminum alloy for heat exchanger using ball end milling. Journal of the Korean Society for Power System Engineering 19(1):64–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jomaa W, Songmene V, Bocher P (2014) Surface finish and residual stresses induced by orthogonal dry machining of AA7075-T651. Materials 7:1603–1624.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7031603 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suraratchai M, Limido J, Mabru C, Chieragatti R (2008) Modelling the influence of machined surface roughness on the fatigue life of aluminium alloy. Int J Fatigue 30:2119–2126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Monine VI, Filho JP, Gonzaga RS, Passos EKD, Teixeira de Assis J (2018) X-ray diffraction technique for residual stress measurement in NiCrMo alloy weld metal. Adv in Mater Sci Eng (8986423, 10 pages).  https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8986423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Robinson JS, Tanner DA, Truman CE, Paradowska AM, Wimpory RC (2012) The influence of quench sensitivity on residual stresses in the aluminium alloys 7010 and 7075. Mater Charact 65:73–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Niknam SA, Tiabi A, Songméné V (2019) Burr edge occupancy: an edge finishing index for milling machined parts. Trans Can Soc Mech Eng 43(2):248–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xu D, Feng P, Li W, Ma Y, Liu B (2014) Research on chip formation parameters of aluminum alloy 6061-T6 based on high-speed orthogonal cutting model. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 72:955–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kouadri S, Necib K, Atlati S, Haddag B, Nouari M (2013) Quantification of the chip segmentation in metal machining: application to machining the aeronautical aluminium alloy AA2024-T351 with cemented carbide tools WC-Co. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 64:102–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kovac P, Sidjanin L (1997) Investigation of chip formation during milling. Int J Production Economics 51:149–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Hamed
    • 1
  • Yasser Zedan
    • 2
  • Agnes M. Samuel
    • 1
  • Herbert W. Doty
    • 3
  • F. H. Samuel
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Département des Sciences AppliquéesUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiChicoutimiCanada
  2. 2.École de technologie supérieure, Département de génie mécaniqueMontréalCanada
  3. 3.General Motors Materials EngineeringPontiacUSA

Personalised recommendations